Re: Caution: metadiscussion ahead (fwd)

[Yiing Lin <ylin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 96 02:29:44 EST
From: John Roberts <roberts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Caution: metadiscussion ahead


>Date: Sat, 20 Jan 1996 12:13:20 -0600
>From: bercov@xxxxxxxxxx (John Bercovitz)
>Subject: Caution: metadiscussion ahead

>It's come to my attention yet again that only a small percentage of 
>our 850+ members are actually reading the proceedings of this august
>journal in their entirety.  
>...Ryko suggests, as many of you have in the past, that the list should
>be split up into more manageable, digestible, sizes.
 
>There's no real disadvantage to multiple lists; you can subscribe to 
>them all.  

A few *possible* difficulties:
 - While those of us who have been on the list would know which ones we're
   interested in, it would be more confusing to newcomers. (If someone sees
   my cameras, and asks about 3D, do I refer them to the list on linear
   polarizers, or to the list on circular polarizers, or just present them with
   a list of lists? :-)
 - Cross-posting could increase the traffic load for those who subscribe to
   multiple lists. If there is a splitup, perhaps it should be between areas
   of least common interest, rather than any more logical division of the
   field of 3D. (For instance, stereo card collection plus viewmaster plus
   3D movies plus artistic appreciation might make a workable "sublist" since
   it groups the broad area of image appreciation. But then other interest
   groupings might be incompatible.) 

>So whaddaya think?
 
While it may eventually have to be split, for the time being I prefer a
unified list.

Speaking of metadiscussions:
Could someone please repost the description of how to subscribe/unsubscribe/
get archives/ftp site/FAQ/etc. that used to be posted occasionally?

Thanks to all those who keep the list going.
John R


------------------------------